lilypond-user
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Aw: Re: Re: Pseudo-handwritten font


From: Torsten Hämmerle
Subject: Aw: Re: Re: Pseudo-handwritten font
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 14:46:52 +0100 (CET)

Hi Werner,

> What do you mean with `rigid'?

Some things related to Feta/Emmentaler access are still being handled deep inside non-public scheme coding or even C source code and consequently very hard to tweak.
Amongst the most "stubborn" stencils are multi measure rests where the glyph names are assembled in the C code by concatenating strings. These things are very hard to manipulate from "outside".
Another example: It's easy to change the font used for ChordNames, but the accidentals will be Feta accidentals and there is no straight-forward way to replace them by anything else.
That's what I meant by "rigid".

> It's not necessary to use Metafont at all! However,
> you currently rely on the glyph metrics from feta
> (at least partially), but you use different glyphs.
> To be really independent you have to add `LILC',
> `LILF', and `LILY' tables to the font.
> I can imagine that it is not too complicated to
> write corresponding scripts for FontForge.

Ah, great, thanks, I wasn't sure about that and, frankly, I don't even know the format/contents of these lookup tables, let alone how to coerce FontForge to have them embedded into the font...


> I vote for adding the stuff as-is since it is very non-intrusive,
> and better LilyPond integration can be a future project.

Yes, just let's look how far we can get using this non-destructive method... :)

I'm just happy that in the meantime some "main actors" as David or even Jan seem to acknowledge the fact that Lilypond would certainly benefit from being able to produce "jazz output".

Take care,
Torsten

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]